Seat belts

[Tom-D]

Thursday I was ordering my seat belts for the rear seat in the 170, The guy at BAS asked if I wanted the 48" or the 32". I thought for minute, then it struck me as funny and started to laugh, the guy asked what was funny.

I told him any one who would need a 48" lap belt, couldn't get into a 170 rear seat.

He laughed too.

 

[Aeric]

Possibly the extra length of the longer one could be used to secure something other than a human body? Pet carrier?

 

[Tom-D]

Possibly the extra length of the longer one could be used to secure something other than a human body? Pet carrier?

If you were going to carry cargo simply pull the back seat and use the cargo hold downs

 

[wanttaja]

Don't some older designs have a single long belt for two seats?

Ron Wanttaja

 

[Brad Z]

Thursday I was ordering my seat belts for the rear seat in the 170, The guy at BAS asked if I wanted the 48" or the 32". I thought for minute, then it struck me as funny and started to laugh, the guy asked what was funny.

I told him any one who would need a 48" lap belt, couldn't get into a 170 rear seat.

He laughed too.

I must have 32" belts in the back of my 182. Any one fatter than a supermodel basically uses the belt at the full length. I've also had people who couldn't manage to bucket the belt. Moral of the stoy is to consider how far back under the seat the mounting points are.

 

[docmirror]

Don't some older designs have a single long belt for two seats?

Ron Wanttaja

Navions of some vintage, and very early J4, and I think maybe a few Pacer PA-20s. I recall sitting in the back of a J4 with my GF and making out in the single belt as my buddy flew.

 

[Tom-D]

I must have 32" belts in the back of my 182. Any one fatter than a supermodel basically uses the belt at the full length. I've also had people who couldn't manage to bucket the belt. Moral of the stoy is to consider how far back under the seat the mounting points are.

The belts in the 170 are attached to the rear seat at the back of the lower cushion.

 

[Tom-D]

Don't some older designs have a single long belt for two seats?

Ron Wanttaja

Yes,,,,, the 170 isn't one of them.

 

[Aeric]

If you were going to carry cargo simply pull the back seat and use the cargo hold downs

I didn't think of that. My airplane doesn't have a back seat.

 

[kgruber]

Don't some older designs have a single long belt for two seats?

Ron Wanttaja

I flew a PA-14 with one belt for two in the back.

 

[silver-eagle]

Shortly after I bought the Warrior, I replaced the belts. The ones up front were less than 40" though they looked stock. They barely fit.
Longer is better.

 

[denverpilot]

Thursday I was ordering my seat belts for the rear seat in the 170, The guy at BAS asked if I wanted the 48" or the 32". I thought for minute, then it struck me as funny and started to laugh, the guy asked what was funny.

I told him any one who would need a 48" lap belt, couldn't get into a 170 rear seat.

He laughed too.

One will have room to adjust. The other won't. Just a thought. It's not like you use them at maximum extension most of the time.

 

[Tom-D]

In the 170 rear seat, the belts go around at most 2/3rds of the pax, If 32 inches is not enough to do that you are not flying, it is that simple.

 

[denverpilot]

In the 170 rear seat, the belts go around at most 2/3rds of the pax, If 32 inches is not enough to do that you are not flying, it is that simple.

Hmm true. Guess belt size isn't the same in airplanes and pants. Heh heh.

 

[Tom-D]

Hmm true. Guess belt size isn't the same in airplanes and pants. Heh heh.

I bet $200.00 on the 32 inch is big as the pax that will fly within CG limits.

 

[denverpilot]

I bet $200.00 on the 32 inch is big as the pax that will fly within CG limits.

I ain't taking that bet! LOL!